Jump to content

Talk:Geography of Minnesota

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merger proposal from Minnesota main land regions

[edit]

The merger proposal was originally on Minnesota. This article is more appropos. The new article proposed to be merged here has almost no content and is entirely duplicated here so deletion would be more appropriate. Kablammo 10:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The merger tag has been removed and Minnesota main land regions has been proposed for deletion. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Minnesota_main_land_regions Kablammo 20:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal from Greater Minnesota

[edit]

Greater Minnesota is really nothing more than a definition, and a parochial one at that. (Who outside the state has ever heard of it?) The article contains that definition, and a list of outstate colleges and universities which is not really germane. Can we not incorporate that definition here, and do away with the separate article? Kablammo 23:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now merged. Kablammo 12:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move to new article?

[edit]

On Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Minnesota#Geography_of_Minnesota I am floating the idea of moving this article to a new article to be entitled Geography of Minnesota, which eventually would be a top-level piece incorporating regions and other geographical information. Kablammo 16:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Gopher backer 18:10, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions

[edit]

Possible areas for improvement:

  • Geology- cut back, given detail already in Minnesota and Geology of Minnesota; focus instead on topography and physiographic regions
  • Flora and fauna- perhaps just address regional variations, including biomes; summarize Ecology of Minnesota
  • Climate- add climate types, growing regions, and regional variations, but without duplicating Climate of Minnesota except in very summary fashion
  • Regions- either break into subsections, or subsume content in remainder of article. Main regions under any classification seem to be NW, NE, SW, SE, and Central (and sometimes Metro); other areas are just subregions within them.
  • Perhaps add new sections on:

Kablammo 21:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regions

[edit]

The attempt to add the Great River Road as a region may be an impetus to rationalize the template and organization of this page. We may want to consider having regions and subregions, See List_of_regions_of_the_United_States#North_Carolina for how North Carolina handles it. Unlike North Carolina, I would go further and limit the state template only to the larger regions, but that would be a closer question. (If everyone adds their favorite subregion the template would get pretty crowded.) One possible division of regions which seems to be well-recognized, and of subregions, is:

  • Northwest

These six large regions are recognized geologically and geographically.

The department of tourism lists four regions:[1]

  • NE
  • North Central/West (combining Central and NW)
  • Metro
  • South (combining SW and SE)

This classification, with the two combinations mentioned, is not far off the 6 geographic/geologic regions.

Within each region we can let people add subregions, if supported by external sources.

We still of course will note in the article other divisions, such as Congressional districts and biomes.

Kablammo 19:14, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't regions simply be any area that with cultural, historical, political or geographical significance on a size beyond a single county and/or spannning beyond a single city? This eliminates the small areas on the local level. If it is inside a single county inclusion would have be to be significant in one or more of those 4 areas.
I thought the template was meant to highlight Minnesota. The GRR highlights the entire miss river region inside the state. The state of Minnesota itself is who does this.
--flyingember —Preceding comment was added at 00:32, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments and your interest. The problems I have with the suggestion are twofold:
  1. The Great River Road is not a region, but a ribbon of highway which, with its nearby features, is being promoted for educational and tourism purposes, on areas which may not have much in common except for their proximity to the river.
  2. More importantly, the Great River Road in Minnesota goes through very distinct regions. South of the Twin Cities it goes through a deep and scenic valley, which continues for hundreds of miles downstream. It has a lot in common with the valley along Wisconsin, Iowa and Illinois. But upstream of Minneapolis the river is small and relatively insignificant, and did not have much of an effect on the landscape, at least in comparative terms. The North Woods area where it originates, and the post-glacial landscape of Central Minnesota, are completely different from what most people associate with the Mississippi-- there is no deep valley, no wide river, no river traffic. While scenic in its own right, Mark Twain might not even recognize it as his river.
So while your suggestion makes sense for the river downstream of Minneapolis, it seems to be an artificial construct to call the river upstream of there part of a common region.
Kablammo 00:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since when was chisago county part of the metro? It's got hazelden and taylors falls, but other than that its just corn mostly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spacemutiny (talk • contribs) 18:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chisago County is part of the United States Census Bureau's definition of the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA).--Appraiser (talk) 22:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Like so many of the Minnesota articles, this one is excellent. However, I am not so wild about the "regional" breakdown by political congressional district, nor demographically, nor culturally. These all seem to me to require separate articles and are not part of geography at all. Student7 (talk) 02:47, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Geography of Minnesota. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:10, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Geography of Minnesota. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:28, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Geography of Minnesota. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:51, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Geography_of_Minnesota&oldid=1202251697"